Advocates:
For the Applicant: Shri Raghvendra Pradhan
For the Respondent: Smt. Subha Shrivastava

Certainly. Based on the provided legal document, here are the key points summarized:

1. The case involves a bail application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, filed by the accused Chandrahas Dadsena (!) .

2. The allegations against the applicant concern sexual conduct under false pretense of marriage, leading to pregnancy and subsequent abortion (!) .

3. The applicant's counsel argued that the victim is a married woman who came into contact with the applicant via social media, and that the applicant has been in custody since 11/08/2025, with the trial expected to take some time (!) .

4. The State opposed the bail, noting that the charge sheet has already been filed (!) .

5. The Court considered the facts, including the nature of the allegations, the victim's marital status, the period of detention, and the likelihood of trial delay, and found that the applicant is entitled to bail (!) .

6. The bail was granted on the condition that the applicant furnishes a personal bond with two sureties of equal amount, and complies with specific conditions such as not seeking adjournments, remaining present on trial dates, and cooperating with court proceedings (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) .

7. The Court emphasized that considerations like the nature of allegations, the victim's marital status, and the duration of custody are crucial factors in bail decisions, especially when trial delays are anticipated [paras 3, 6, 7].

8. The order was issued on 08/09/2025, and the office was directed to send a certified copy of the order to the trial court (!) (!) .

If you require further analysis or specific legal advice based on this case, please let me know.